NoRelToEmber

9 ms·

61.
by NoRelToEmber 3y ago
> So dismissively claiming the trauma of rape is over once it’s over is both wrong, and frankly sick. I really did not think a sarcasm tag was required, but here we are. > there is plenty of evidence showing that rape is significant
62.
by NoRelToEmber 3y ago
> I think history is a bit more complex than that. I am introducing that complexity. It is the article that omitted it to tell a simple bad guys oppressing good guys tale. > 1492 Spain as such didn’t exist. The Moors invaded the Visig
63.
by NoRelToEmber 3y ago
To add come crucial context the article deceptively chose to omit: the Alhambra decree was passed in 1492, the same year that Spain was liberated from seven centuries of Moorish conquest and colonization [1], during which it had been used a
64.
by NoRelToEmber 3y ago
> the government Which government, though? Open source projects know no borders, they can get funding from any and every government they want.
65.
by NoRelToEmber 3y ago
> controlled > funded The two are not the same. Regardless, you could still use any browser you wish.
66.
by NoRelToEmber 3y ago
> I honestly can't think of a bigger waste of public money. Say that again when the address bar says "brought to you by Pepsi™", and every website you visit is sent to the manufacturer - like LG TVs sent filenames found on
67.
by NoRelToEmber 3y ago
By making web standards so complex only well-funded corporate efforts can maintain a browser, we've insured browsers represent corporate interests ahead of user interests. We must cut this Gordian knot while still can. Some combination
68.
by NoRelToEmber 3y ago
It may seem minor, but unless these things are fought, they will slowly creep until anything that's not a corporate-approved computer/OS/browser is effectively quarantined from the internet. It will make adoption of free soft
69.
by NoRelToEmber 3y ago
> I’ve seen individual researchers ruined due to USB drive shenanigans Could you elaborate?
70.
by NoRelToEmber 3y ago
Yeah they put tracking in our cars without telling us, but I'll trust them they won't do individual tracking because they pinky swear it. Unless law enforcement requests that data, but luckily cops only go after bad people, and th
71.
by NoRelToEmber 3y ago
When you run for office and realize the party in power knows literally everything about you, and is using it to find dirt on you (and they're free to take all they find out of context), and target you for legal investigations, play six
72.
by NoRelToEmber 3y ago
> What data could it transmit that I or anyone cares about? The question is what data does it need to transmit. The answer is none. Rear cameras and tracking are entirely unrelated, though I'm sure car manufacturers will try to co
73.
How U.C. Berkeley tried to buoy Black enrollment without affirmative action(reuters.com)
4 points by NoRelToEmber 3y ago|0 comments
74.
by NoRelToEmber 3y ago
We've seen too many times how bogus this saying is. You can pay top dollar for a high-end TV, and it'll still spy on you and show you ads in the menus [1]. You either control the software , or you are the product. No amount of Da
75.
by NoRelToEmber 3y ago
> There are no actually meaningful ways to get in touch with a service that can cause immense harm to your or your businesses reputation and trustworthiness - in similar ways that defamation can How isn't this defamation, actually?
76.
by NoRelToEmber 3y ago
Human impact on the environment = lifestyle * population. Just how gigantic do you think the improvements in the 'lifestyle' term are going to be, that you think we can ignore the other term? ...how big have the improvements been
77.
by NoRelToEmber 3y ago
More information on this topic, though perhaps not on the "why", but the "how", specifically, "how the public was tricked to go along with it", which included endorsing known-bogus intelligence: https:/&#
78.
by NoRelToEmber 3y ago
You talk as if XMPP failing on its own, and Google trying to kill it, are mutually-exclusive.
79.
by NoRelToEmber 3y ago
It's convenient that one can't point out deceptive characterization of censorship, or highlight the nature of existing censorship, without implying a bunch of strawman positions that are easy to argue against, isn't it?
80.
by NoRelToEmber 3y ago
It seems unusual an article would spend so much attention deconstructing the psychology of gun ownership, but zero on statistics about how often guns are used in self-defense - the commonly stated reason for gun purchases. Especially as it&
81.
by NoRelToEmber 3y ago
> Those millions brought in by Google and Facebook didn't care about the federated nature of an extensible messaging protocol, they wanted to talk to their friends. Yes, and instead of using "true XMPP" to talk to their fr
82.
by NoRelToEmber 3y ago
I love corporations overzealously enforcing laws on people through those people's private devices.
83.
by NoRelToEmber 3y ago
> Then you argue that you, and not someone else, should be deciding what censorship is warranted. Where did I argue that? I just pointed out that what reddit is doing is censorship, and that painting it as only banning spam and vulgari
84.
by NoRelToEmber 3y ago
> To oversimplify natural selection into “if you’re dumb, you might die and that’s good for the future of humanity” is absurd. There are many reasons why smart people do dumb things, like drive recklessly, use dangerous substances, or ar
85.
by NoRelToEmber 3y ago
Typical motte and bailey example. Are all-caps expletive-ridden posts the only thing that gets censored? Or is it also stuff like citing factual statistics from reliable sources? we can no longer allow any posts, comments, or other conte
86.
by NoRelToEmber 3y ago
> That's not censorship (which legally refers to government restricting speech) Censorship can be conducted by governments, private institutions and other controlling bodies. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ce
87.
by NoRelToEmber 3y ago
I think the bloating hardware requirements are his point. What precisely have they gotten us? Mind you, this is not the same as "what have we gotten in the time that they've bloated"!
88.
by NoRelToEmber 3y ago
Not necessarily, but usually. E.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36422476 linked a clip from the West Wing that blames biased Eurocentric maps for perpetuating colonialism.
89.
by NoRelToEmber 3y ago
Another poster [1] gives the answer: their children's report cards looked great, and they had no idea how poorly they were doing until they got standardized test results. I'm sorry that they're a "drag", but standar
90.
by NoRelToEmber 3y ago
Unilaterally? If they want to use maps that center Asia in their education and work, who is stopping them? In fact I'd wager they start their education by learning about the geography of Asia first. I'm puzzled by this demonizatio

More ›